There's a big difference between being wishy-washy about supporting gay marriage and actively leading a campaign to ban it after it became legal in 1999 in Hawaii while slamming those who disagree with her as members of a homosexual conspiracy.

I don't live in Hawaii, but if you do by all means if her progressive positions are not progressive enough for you. She's not Green party so I can't 'stan' for Tulsi, but I can certainly point out my opinions.

Logically I would have to be ignoring the issue on purpose or willfully lying, since I'm not consciously doing either then the answer is No to both. But I think you've already decided for yourself so that's moot. Tulsi as a young politician is not going to be President in 2020, she does however have time to prove through experience if she has indeed 'changed' or not on these matters in the years to come, but that's up to Hawaii regardless.

Since joining Congress in 2013, Gabbard has supported efforts to promote LGBT equality, including co-sponsoring pro-LGBT legislation like The Equality Act, a bill to amend the 1964 Civil Rights Act to protect LGBT individuals.

Yes, that's a reasonable, logical conclusion to take away from my criticism of Tulsi Gabbard.

...

No, you reductive dolt, I believe that you can rightly criticize American military adventurism without the need to defend and apologize for tyrants like Bashar al Assad when they intentionally mass murder their citizens with nerve gas attacks. Just like Donald Trump, Tulsi Gabbard has a record of defending authoritarian war makers because those war makers are against the American military establishment. Just like Donald Trump (and apparently you), she has a zero-sum view of foreign policy. Your idiotic, reductive argument that I must either "support Tulsi Gabbard or be in favor of bombing innocent civilians" is the stupidest thing I've read all morning. But, then again, I haven't read Trump's tweets and or any of your other posts yet, so there's still plenty of opportunity to surpass that stupidity.